I realized that "without" can be used in hypotheses while "deprived of" can't. For example, "Without you, I can't do ..." this can be used in the situation where I still have you, but I want to emphasize the importance of you, right?
–
trVoldemortApr 3 '11 at 12:49

+1. And since the questioner seems to want sentences without "without", the second sentence can be reworked similar to the 3rd suggestion here: "Life would be miserable, were it not for you" (or "...if it weren't for you") - though this sounds somewhat more formal than the version with "without".
–
psmearsMar 9 '11 at 15:06

"Deprived of" generally implies that something has been taken away, whereas "without" can simply mean that something was missing in the first place. For example:

Deprived of his partner, he couldn't win by himself.

This is a correct usage. It implies that he originally had a partner, but lost him and can no longer win.

The latter two examples do not work so well. When someone says "Life would be miserable without you," they could be implying that life would be miserable if you left, or if they had never met you. "Life would be miserable deprived of you" only means that life would be miserable if you left, and sounds somewhat foreign as well.

But is there any way I can avoid using "without"?
–
trVoldemortMar 9 '11 at 11:14

@trVoldemort: "Life would be miserable if I had to live without you." "He would not have been able to speak if this technology had not been discovered/unless this technology had been discovered."
–
TragicomicMar 9 '11 at 13:53